FORUMS: list search recent posts

Fusion now available for Mac OS X

COW Forums : Adobe Creative Cloud Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Mathis
Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 27, 2015 at 11:31:26 pm

Now that it is here, wanting to hear your thoughts. Still going to subscribe to After Effects for now? Going to make a change? Love to hear your thoughts.

For now Photoshop will remain in my tool box, still have another 9 months until it is time to renew, so leaving is not an option.

Tim, want to hear from you as well. :)

The magnetic timeline, it's magnetic-o-matic!



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 29, 2015 at 2:44:53 am

I bet there is going to be a lot of "Fusion looks interesting, I will look into it and see what the final version is like" and ultimately no one will actually switch.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 29, 2015 at 2:22:01 pm

[Gary Huff] "ultimately no one will actually switch"

My guess as well. After all, Shake under Apple was considerably cheaper than AE at the end, and that didn't cause any mass exodus either.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 29, 2015 at 8:46:56 pm

That is true but it might be another tool to consider for more complex compositing even green screen work. It is more likely to be used as an alternative to Nuke, which has a very high price of admission.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 2:45:35 pm

[David Mathis] "That is true but it might be another tool to consider for more complex compositing even green screen work. It is more likely to be used as an alternative to Nuke, which has a very high price of admission."

For individual artists, yes. For studios, I think NUKE is still very much worth the price. It's a lot automation- and pipeline-friendly. Fusion has some hooks, but it needs more development and a lot more documentation.

If you're doing a lot of CG, NUKE offers vastly superior multichannel and linear support.

On the softer side, NUKE is what all the good freelancers know right now. Fusion has a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem in terms of talent pool in high-end comp.

NUKE does cost a lot, but it does a lot, too, and I think its high price tag is well-deserved. But it's not necessarily a "price of admission:" there's NUKE Non-Commercial for learning:

https://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/nuke/non-commercial/

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 2:57:19 pm

[Walter Soyka] "On the softer side, NUKE is what all the good freelancers know right now. Fusion has a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem in terms of talent pool in high-end comp."

I think what gets murky in these conversations is that because something is free, users will gravitate towards it and a critical mass is achieved. Not all tools follow that trend. If you talk about NLEs, then the potential market is very broad and everyone, except the top tier of users, will be more-than-happy with the lower cost, possibly more intuitive tools, like FCP X. After all, when you look at the compositing, color correction, and titling needs of most editors (at all levels), the built-in FCP X tools are more than adequate.

When it gets to something like advanced color correction or compositing, you are no longer talking about casual users, but those who make their money with that software. Therefore, tools like Resolve, Nuke, Fusion, Maya, Smoke, Flame, Baselight, etc. don't need to be low cost or free. Users are generally willing to pay the price, because there's income to back it. The needs are completely different than the needs of most NLE users.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 5:02:58 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Therefore, tools like Resolve, Nuke, Fusion, Maya, Smoke, Flame, Baselight, etc. don't need to be low cost or free."

To also echo Walter's "worth a lot because they do a lot" observation, it has been quite remarkable to see the growth of Quantel Pablo and Filmlight Baselight at a time when cheaper tools are supposed to be undermining expensive tools out of existence.

True, but not quite true enough. On the contrary, there's heavier lifting than ever to be done, and some tools are optimized for the heaviest of lifting. Even with Resolve, I hope you are all fortunate enough to witness a colorist wizard in full effect, rocking the Resolve board. Awe-inducing, and very much underscores this point.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 6:00:57 pm

[Oliver Peters] "When it gets to something like advanced color correction or compositing, you are no longer talking about casual users, but those who make their money with that software. Therefore, tools like Resolve, Nuke, Fusion, Maya, Smoke, Flame, Baselight, etc. don't need to be low cost or free. Users are generally willing to pay the price, because there's income to back it. The needs are completely different than the needs of most NLE users.

- Oliver"


The big name studios can afford it and make a profit. Smaller shops, that depends on the workflow and client base. Casual user is going to probably go with Fusion. I don't think that Baselight or Nuke is overpriced by any means. Some would argue that if Fusion can be had for free or next to nothing, why would the other software be so expensive? Different needs, different demographics, different user base is my answer.

Having said that, the less expensive tools would help those wanting to enter the market or get a degree in a related field the chance to do so without adding additional debt to the already expensive student loan. Just my two cents, carry on!

The magnetic timeline, it's magnetic-o-matic!



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 6:41:09 pm

[David Mathis] "Casual user is going to probably go with Fusion"

I doubt any casual users, except a few adventuresome soles will use it at all. Try it, yes. Maybe use it for green screen on occasion. Otherwise, I'm highly skeptical. The exception would be editors and others who are more tech savvy, but that's a pretty small group.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 1, 2015 at 2:45:17 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I doubt any casual users, except a few adventuresome soles will use it at all. Try it, yes."

And by "try" you mean "Installed it, booted it up once, clicked around, closed it forever."


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:09:04 pm
Last Edited By Tim Wilson on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:39:52 pm

[David Mathis] "Smaller shops, that depends on the workflow and client base. "

I think it's even harder and faster than that. A single person shop, and you want to freelance? Nuke. End of story.

Okay, and After Effects. :-)

So I would put it the opposite way, and even more strongly: there's no reason to use Fusion unless your workflow depends on it. Because your client base won't.

Contrast this with Resolve, of course. Yes, accessible for many casual users, but also with decades of heritage as a major player and a massive freelance opportunity -- including right here in the COW, where freelance Resolve postings are going up in our Jobs section nearly every day.

I don't recall ever seeing a request for Fusion operators, although plenty that require Nuke expertise.

And After Effects. :-)



[David Mathis] "Casual user is going to probably go with Fusion. "

But only if they're committed to working with nodes. I mean, nodes are powerful and fun, and there's no reason in the world not to become a ninja master of as many tools as possible...

...but really, apart from its fundamental non-Adobe-ness, is the appeal that it's free so you might as well explore it? In either case, go for it. You really will get a kick out of it.

But as anyone's new VFX / titling / motion graphics / compositing hub, I ain't seein' it. I've heard a lot of talk about it throughout the COW, but the words I've yet to hear are "Wow, this is so much better than After Effects or Motion" or, "This supplies exactly the feature set I've been missing!" Just, "It's not Adobe and it's free!"

BTW, please don't let my dismissing its practicality be taken as a dismissal of its legit-ness, though. We LOVE that Blackmagic has bought it. We were very, very early proponents of Fusion, and great fans of Steve Roberts here at the COW, and very sorry to see that forum go nowhere at all....

Which reminds me, David, you're right, I'm quite tardy in launching a new Fusion forum.

Although for now, the forum might have to be named "Fusion Or Not: The Debate," with a Techniques forum to be opened once people start using it. LOL

In the meantime fellers, do you foresee any kind of sea change coming out of Fusion, if it were to be seamlessly integrated into Resolve as The One NLE To Rule Them All?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:15:09 pm

[Tim Wilson] "But as anyone's new VFX / titling / motion graphics / compositing hub, I ain't seein' it."

Right up there with the mass exodus to HitFilm.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:32:48 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Right up there with the mass exodus to HitFilm."

Or Lightworks.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:33:35 pm

Tim,

Thanks for responding to my post and adding your words of wisdom. I have nothing against subscribing as long as it meets my needs, just prefer to have other alternatives as a safety net. I have subscribed to Photoshop, so far so good. Price is reasonable and the tools are robust.

I would consider After Effects but for now Motion works just fine, nothing to do with subscription only. I am open minded.

Just started playing around with Fusion, certainly not going to use it for motion graphics as layer based is a better approach. After all, why would I hit a nail with a screwdriver when a hammer is the better tool?

As far as adding some pieces of flare, nothing to do with the movie "Office Space", I kind of like fusion. I feel a little more at ease with nodes, that is just me. I feel like I am more in touch with what is going on. I don't have to think about layers, it is a single shot, so nodes just feel a bit more natural.

Glad to see Adobe stepping up their game plan. I might just subscribe to After Effects in a few months.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:52:21 pm

[David Mathis] "As far as adding some pieces of flare, nothing to do with the movie "Office Space", I kind of like fusion."

Fusion is really cool. I bought it from Eyeon shortly before the sale. It's a capable, fast and mature (if not somewhat quirky) compositor, and my misgivings about pricing aside, it's in great hands right now with BMD.

I think we'll see some in-roads in indie projects because FREE, but I think the best driver for adoption of Fusion will be Resolve integration. Not uber app-style, but Adobe Dynamic Link, Apple Send To Motion, or Avid Connect-style integration. I think that comp and color are converging, so getting these tools closer together is a big deal.

A hidden gem in all this is Generation. I misquote Vince Lombardi a lot in pitches and presentations: "Workflow isn't everything. It's the only thing." The ideas in Generation (even if they are ultimately absorbed into Resolve) are a fantastic foundation for next-gen products.

Finally, I'd love to add some pieces of Flare [link], but that's a separate topic!

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 1, 2015 at 2:46:09 pm
Last Edited By Gary Huff on Sep 1, 2015 at 2:46:22 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Apple Send To Motion"

Ha! That's a myth. ;-)


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 1, 2015 at 7:27:59 pm

[Gary Huff] "Ha! That's a myth. ;-)"

A myth... or a Legend?

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Aug 31, 2015 at 7:56:41 pm

[Tim Wilson] "
In the meantime fellers, do you foresee any kind of sea change coming out of Fusion, if it were to be seamlessly integrated into Resolve as The One NLE To Rule Them All?"


Nope, not personally. The knock against AE from a lot of editors was that is was clunky and hard to use. For the most part, they seemed to want motion graphics creation and keying to be easy. "They" didn't understand why those tasks had to be so time consuming... even with the myriad of plugins and scripts that were designed to do just that. Enter Motion, it was fast, easy to use and provided really powerful tools for the editor to easily do things that took time and effort in AE. Surely, that was the change everyone was waiting for... nope, for reasons that I still can't explain, the uptake of Motion by editors was slow and (IMO), did almost nothing to move users away from AE in any meaningful way. Then there was FCPX, lots to love in the way of making graphics creation easier for editors... has it peeled away a significant number of editors from AE use? I doubt it. Now there's Fusion... much more manual than AE, more time consuming to create motion graphics, far fewer plugins and a completely different operating model to learn.

Even if BMD can smooth out Resolve's rough spots enough to make it the NLE of choice for a large number of editors, I still don't see Fusion as any major threat to AE's domination in the mograph space, no matter how good the integration story between Resolve and Fusion might become.

I think Fusion will be a hit amongst the indie 3D/VFX crowd... but I don't think it will do much if anything to AE's popularity. I think it will just be another tool in the pipeline along with zBrush/Maya/Blender/AE etc.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 3:29:38 am

[Tim Wilson] "I don't recall ever seeing a request for Fusion operators, although plenty that require Nuke expertise.

And After Effects. :-)"


And how long has Black Magic owned Fusion?


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 6:32:38 am

[Chris Pettit] "[Tim Wilson] "I don't recall ever seeing a request for Fusion operators, although plenty that require Nuke expertise.

And After Effects. :-)"

And how long has Black Magic owned Fusion?"


Fusion has been around for a long time. I think the DFX+ version used to ship with the Video Toaster 2. I've had an interest in it (Fusion) for over a decade and even started learning it (along with Nuke) a few years ago. Now, I'm back on it with a much more serious focus. But to Tim's point, Nuke is everywhere now... Fusion, not nearly as much.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Chris Pettit
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 1:58:01 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Fusion has been around for a long time. I think the DFX+ version used to ship with the Video Toaster 2. I've had an interest in it (Fusion) for over a decade and even started learning it (along with Nuke) a few years ago. Now, I'm back on it with a much more serious focus. But to Tim's point, Nuke is everywhere now... Fusion, not nearly as much."

sorry, I was in a hurry so didn't explain my thought properly. It wasn't that long ago that you could say the same thing about Adobe premiere for example. it wasn't widely used, other tools prevailed and you wouldn't get a job as a "premiere" editor. But thats changed now. Give it time, lets see what Black Magic does with Fusion and with Resolve. I don't see the current adoption rate as that relevant for the future. There are a lot of people out there looking for alternatives to Adobe I can assure you.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 4:38:13 pm

[Chris Pettit] "sorry, I was in a hurry so didn't explain my thought properly. It wasn't that long ago that you could say the same thing about Adobe premiere for example. it wasn't widely used, other tools prevailed and you wouldn't get a job as a "premiere" editor. But thats changed now. Give it time, lets see what Black Magic does with Fusion and with Resolve. I don't see the current adoption rate as that relevant for the future."

That makes sense. Although, I would like to add that here in my area, Premiere Pro has been a popular choice for corporate, event and motion graphics folks for a long time. When I was freelancing over a decade ago, the vast majority of my paid editing work was on Premiere.

[Chris Pettit] " There are a lot of people out there looking for alternatives to Adobe I can assure you."

No doubt! However, I'm not yet convinced that editors who are looking for alternatives to AE are going to embrace Fusion. I also continue to find it surprising that Hitfilm isn't getting more attention in these discussions... it seems like a more natural alternative to After Effects. It does to me, anyway. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 3, 2015 at 3:06:14 pm

[Shawn Miller] "I also continue to find it surprising that Hitfilm isn't getting more attention in these discussions... it seems like a more natural alternative to After Effects. It does to me, anyway. :-)"

My impression of HitFilm, simply from the marketing as I haven't used it, is that it's geared towards people making effects for fan films.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 3, 2015 at 3:17:41 pm

[Gary Huff] "My impression of HitFilm, simply from the marketing as I haven't used it, is that it's geared towards people making effects for fan films."

It's got some nice features, including a more editorial mindset than Ae, a true 3D particle system that interacts properly with other 3D layers, and built-in projection.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 3, 2015 at 5:31:59 pm

[Gary Huff] "[Shawn Miller] "I also continue to find it surprising that Hitfilm isn't getting more attention in these discussions... it seems like a more natural alternative to After Effects. It does to me, anyway. :-)"

My impression of HitFilm, simply from the marketing as I haven't used it, is that it's geared towards people making effects for fan films."


Yes, I believe that's their core market. But I think they have the building blocks for a pretty decent motion graphics tool; text engine, keyframe animation, OFX plugin compatibility. etc. They have a motion graphics playist on their YouTube channel, it might be worth checking out for those looking for an AE replacement.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 5:05:41 pm

[Chris Pettit] "I don't see the current adoption rate as that relevant for the future. There are a lot of people out there looking for alternatives to Adobe I can assure you."

I agree that people are looking for alternatives to Adobe, but the point that several of us are making is that Fusion is not it, not now, not ever.


[Shawn Miller] "Fusion has been around for a long time. I think the DFX+ version used to ship with the Video Toaster 2"

Exactly. And more recently, bundled with Avid. Did you hear anything about it being incorporated into Avid workflows for features and TV, ie, almost every feature and TV show?

Admittedly, you WILL be hearing more of this because BMD's PR is among the best this industry has ever seen, but in the context of mainstream TV and film production, After Effects touches darn near all of them, and still will after Fusion becomes ubiquitous.

To jump the rails and pretend that I'm in the FCPX Debate forum, ima use a simile (which over there, they still insist on calling a metaphor). You can drive a nail with a shoe, but if you're looking for a new hammer OR a new shoe, nobody in their right mind is going to choose the other.

Resolve was different. It was designed for a purpose, and what Blackmagic did was make that purpose-built tool more accessible for people who had that purpose. You want to do color grading? Here's color grading.

Even the addition of editing features is in tune with the same purpose. They were initially developed to finesse the offline-online relationship. Any evolution from there is just that.

But there has been no fundamental change to the nature of Resolve, even as editing becomes more important in the relative mix.

Resolve has also always had at least plausible relationships with other editing applications.

Fusion was never intended to do motion graphics. There's nothing in there for text animation. You could go down the list, and really, other than keying, there's not going to be anything in Fusion that makes an After Effects user now fleeing Adobe to say, "Ah, THIS is what I need to leave After Effects once and for all."

It's just not there, no matter how much somebody wants an alternative to After Effects.

What it DOES offer is a more robust feature set in the context of Resolve, in the context of specific workflows that are currently being served less-well by other node-based compositors.

I also want to note, as Walter did in another post, that many of eyeon's most compelling tools are well beyond the scope of any kind of compositing and VFX, much more in the realm of workflow and scalability...but not available in the free version.

Most people just won't need Fusion, though, ever.

I could be wrong. I often am. But as a formerly heavy user of After Effects, and a developer who worked with lots of compositing environments, including Fusion, AND lots of NLEs, Resolve adding editing features makes all the sense in the world to me -- but Fusion as an alternative to After Effects makes none at all. I don't see the wizards of black magic at Blackmagic being able to change that.

Underscoring again that I WANT people to download Fusion. I'm GLAD that Steve Roberts will have the resources to help Fusion reach its potential and beyond. It DESERVES widescale adoption. Wonderful stuff.

In the meantime, I remain especially eager for the first customer to say, "Hallelujah, I'm home. This is everything I was missing in After Effects" -- OR "Yay! This can do most of what I was doing in After Effects."

There's gotta be at least a handful of people who'll say that, right? Not yet, though. And I doubt there'll ever be more than a handful.

In the end, the feature sets of AE and Fusion overlap just a little more than the features in hammers and shoes.

But most people with hammers also have shoes, right? The values of one don't nullify the other in the least. But they mostly don't replace them either.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 6:07:31 pm

Well said! By the way, just added the free version of Fusion and right you are on it not be a motion graphics tool. Been hoping they, that is Blackmagic Design, would acquire Motion from Apple and would develop it further. I could see that as a possibility of being an alternative to After Effects, though not likely to happen.

As much as Resolve is gaining ground in the editing department, main tool of choice is FCP X, for now. I think the reasons should be obvious. Both are great at what they do, but when editing comes into play, one tool is more appropriate than the other.

For enhancing a single shot, I tend to gravitate towards Fusion just to get a break from layers. It is a challenge but worth learning a new tool. Still much me for to learn, there is a learning curve, but a fun challenge it is.

Now, to photos, well Photoshop is still the best tool. Motion is nice but Photoshop is a better choice. I decided to put my misgivings behind me about rental only. I don't feel cheated by Adobe, they made a business decision. Not happy by it being the only choice, but if it helps me make money, then I will use it. Honestly, looks like the benefits are beginning to out weigh the drawbacks. I still respect viewpoints from either side of the fence.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 6:26:33 pm

[David Mathis] "Been hoping they, that is Blackmagic Design, would acquire Motion from Apple"

Never going to happen. Apple does not sell IP or software they've acquired or created to others. No matter whether or not they've buried it. Obviously no one is getting Color, Aperture, FCP 7, or Final Cut Server.

[David Mathis] "Photoshop is a better choice... Not happy by it being the only choice,"

Affinity Photo is currently the best alternative for Mac users. It really depends on whether you need perfect compatibility with complex Photoshop files that you receive from clients or not. If you were willing to work with stills in Motion, then that wouldn't seem to be the case.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Herbert van der wegen
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 3, 2015 at 6:29:54 am

[Oliver Peters] "Affinity Photo is currently the best alternative for Mac users. It really depends on whether you need perfect compatibility with complex Photoshop files that you receive from clients or not. If you were willing to work with stills in Motion, then that wouldn't seem to be the case."

I disagree: Affinity Photo lacks a couple of essential features for VFX work:
- no 32 bit per channel float
- no HDR
- no linear workflow
- no multi-layered EXR import or export

Aside from these things, it is missing quite a lot of basic functionality compared to Photoline (which I believe to be the best alternative). Photoline arguably outperforms Photoshop in a number of crucial areas, such as the option to work with a HIS/HSV workflow. There is also no need to switch to a different image mode to work in Lab, HSV, or HIS, and any layer can be any image mode, bit depth, and resolution and freely mixed within the same document.

And the latest beta now imports PSD smart objects with bitmap layers intact!

/*----------------------------------------------------*/
System: Win7 64bit - i7 920@3.6Ghz, p6t Deluxe v1, 48gb (6x8gb RipjawsX), ATI 7970 3gb, EVGA 590 3GB, Revodrive X2 240gb, e-mu 1820. Screens: 2 x Samsung s27a850ds 2560x1440, HP 1920x1200 in portrait mode


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 6:38:15 pm

[David Mathis] "Been hoping they, that is Blackmagic Design, would acquire Motion from Apple and would develop it further. I could see that as a possibility of being an alternative to After Effects, though not likely to happen."

I don't think Apple ever sells off its IP. Witness the death and dismemberment of Shake... it won't be coming back for the sequel. But, why not Hitfilm? FXHome keeps developing it, it has a nice, modern particle engine, it has a crap ton of built in effects, it has a decent keyer, it supports OFX plugins and it's much closer to the way Motion and AE operates, so you could probably be up and running quickly. Admittedly, they could have picked a better name and their marketing needs a complete overhaul, but couldn't this be the AE replacement that you've been looking for?

Shawn



Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Fusion now available for Mac OS X
on Sep 2, 2015 at 9:59:21 pm

Just looked at it. Very interested but wanting to know if it has expressions. Price is perfect!


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]